Pathfinder Second Edition Planetouched


Conversions

1 to 50 of 126 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber

I would like to hear your hopes and opinions on the future of planetouched and how they might be done in PH2:
Geniekin, Aasimars, Tieflings, Aphorites, and Ganzi.

Liberty's Edge

16 people marked this as a favorite.

It seems likely we'll get them eventually.

They may well be Heritages (in the vein of Half Elf and Half Orc) rather than Ancestries per se, though. My personal theory is that they'll be 'modular' Heritages you can apply to any Ancestry the GM allows. Which would be pretty cool, IMO, and make a lot of sense.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I’m fond of PF1’s focus on the fiend side of tieflings (rakshasas and kytons are very different, after all), but it also would be cool to be able to give demonic lineage to a gnoll or drow.

Liberty's Edge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
QuidEst wrote:
I’m fond of PF1’s focus on the fiend side of tieflings (rakshasas and kytons are very different, after all), but it also would be cool to be able to give demonic lineage to a gnoll or drow.

No reason you can't do both to some degree. Everyone's got a floating bonus or two (which there could be suggestions based on Fiend ancestor for) and Ancestry Feats could easily be Fiend-type specific.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

*planar scions


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Deadmanwalking wrote:

It seems likely we'll get them eventually.

They may well be Heritages (in the vein of Half Elf and Half Orc) rather than Ancestries per se, though. My personal theory is that they'll be 'modular' Heritages you can apply to any Ancestry the GM allows. Which would be pretty cool, IMO, and make a lot of sense.

I'm personally in support of the modular heritages as well. It fits really well, and we might be able to use it for templates that previously had a level adjustment as well (separating stronger abilities into ancestry feats).


Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
Camellen wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:

It seems likely we'll get them eventually.

They may well be Heritages (in the vein of Half Elf and Half Orc) rather than Ancestries per se, though. My personal theory is that they'll be 'modular' Heritages you can apply to any Ancestry the GM allows. Which would be pretty cool, IMO, and make a lot of sense.

I'm personally in support of the modular heritages as well. It fits really well, and we might be able to use it for templates that previously had a level adjustment as well (separating stronger abilities into ancestry feats).

But how would it interact with heritage as half-orc and deep gnome


Just to be clear, it was explicitly stated during Playtest that Planetouched Dhampir et al will likely use very similar structural approach ("Feat instead of base Ancestry") as Half-Elves and Half-Orcs. Although I never really saw the inherent linkage myself: the groups are not only conceptually distinct but H-E and H-O using that approach or not is simply irrelevant to Planetouched et al using them or not. IMHO it felt like excessive enthusiasm for generic mechanic as such, primarily motivated by Planetouched that weren't topic of CRB, but applying it to H-E and H-O allowed it to be expressed in CRB. I understand trend for standardized systematization in 2ndEd and I generally support it, but I think fundamentalism there can distract from a more sober assesment.

Personally, if not especially opposed to them, I never really cared much for non-Human Planetouched hybrids, it just didn't seem important in Human-centric Golarion which doesn't allow arbitrary combos of every Demi-Human species to begin with. But as far as it goes, it seems strange that amidst excitment for Planetouched-Demihuman hybrids, AFAIK nobody has asked how Half-Elf and Half-Orc Planetouched will work if they both are exclusive choice of Heritage Feats, which is weird exclusion if we are supposed to celebrate every other combo. Dubious combos like Dhampir or Planetouched Samsarans could be explicitly barred, but the entire effort feels misguided and based in mixed metaphors to me.

Anyhow, what I would actually look forward to, irrespective of mechanical approach, is having more setting specifity for the various sub-types of Tieflings, Aasimar et al (or their various Demihuman variants). I want regional distribution or exclusivity to be clear up front in the identity of those variants. I want distinct social identities and relations to be part and parcel of their existence, how is Dwarf-Dhampir thematically and societally different? Mere mechanical distinction and some different art doesn't make me care why these different variants exist in the game world, or give me reason to use them... I think nominally it's well acknowledged that economy of development is major factor in the Heritage Feat approach, but what is real value in enabling mechanical spam out of all proportion to setting development? If f.e. Dwarven-Dhampirs were to be given proper due in setting development, fitting in a fully unique Ancestry for them doesn't seem overly burdensome, so it feels like Heritage Feat approach is not solving a real problem. In that sense, the focus on mechanics feels like putting cart before horse...


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Canewolfconram wrote:

I would like to hear your hopes and opinions on the future of planetouched and how they might be done in PH2:

Geniekin, Aasimars, Tieflings, Aphorites, and Ganzi.

Ancestry Archetypes that allow any race to select into at the cost of an Ancestry Feat, the first one is always a Heritage Feat as well.

Then for Characters that become planetouched later through interacting with the Shadow Plane or making a pact with a Demon, allow them to opt in with Level 9 Ancestry Feats or something with prerequisites appropriate to the Feat (some of these could be AP based).

I'd like the base Races to get something a kin to the "Paragon" Feats at around the same time. This allows parity between the choices as well as character growth outside what was originally possible for character concepts (suddenly people have vehicles for their Half Demon, Vampire, Lycanthrope concepts).

There's enough of these types of characters in literature in media to want an outlet to being them, even if that comes at the consequence of every time you get a table past level 9 there's some half demon/half dragon/ifrit at the table.

But if that's what the player wants, and it's balanced, who am I to judge. There's always banning Ancestry Archetypes you'd rather not see (which people did with Races anyways).


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I support the idea of modular heritages, especially if they include their own set of ancestry feats that can be taken. (And preferably a bit of a background/setting write up.)

That being said, it might be tricky to differentiate between different aasimar/tiefling types with such a system (unless each was its own heritage & all could qualify for the same general ancestry feats).

And while I can somewhat understand the argument of "why can't my half-X also be part planetouched," there has to be a limit somewhere. No matter what is done mechanically, there will always be some combinations that won't be able to work unless you just allow players to be part-everything (i.e. Aasimar/Tiefling or Sylph/Tiefling won't be possible if they use the same system to add to another race). On a thematic side, I'm pretty okay with the idea that you can't make a half-human, half-elf, half-planetouched, etc. While mixed races are fun, it gets a bit ridiculous when you're mixing more than two separate things together.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

I like the idea of Aasimar as an ancestry where the heritages are things like Angelkin, Musetouched, etc. than I do with Aasimar as a heritage or archetype available for any ancestry.

I've never been a fan of non-human aasimar, tieflings, changelings, etc. and I don't know if we need them. It's my preference that "can breed with surprising things" is sort of humanity's superpower in high fantasy settings.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
Charon Onozuka wrote:

I support the idea of modular heritages, especially if they include their own set of ancestry feats that can be taken. (And preferably a bit of a background/setting write up rather than what half-elves/half-orcs saw in the playtest doc.)

That being said, it might be tricky to differentiate between different aasimar/tiefling types with such a system (unless each was its own heritage & all could qualify for the same general ancestry feats).

And while I can somewhat understand the argument of "why can't my half-X also be part planetouched," there has to be a limit somewhere. No matter what is done mechanically, there will always be some combinations that won't be able to work unless you just allow players to be part-everything (i.e. Aasimar/Tiefling or Sylph/Tiefling won't be possible if they use the same system to add to another race). On a thematic side, I'm pretty okay with the idea that you can't make a half-human, half-elf, half-planetouched, etc. While mixed races are fun, it gets a bit ridiculous when you're mixing more than two separate things together.

What do you of a heritage feature similar to what was done for changelings with paternal heritage in Book of heroic races: advanced compendium including one for human heritage but for planetouched for nonplanetouched heritage


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
PossibleCabbage wrote:

I like the idea of Aasimar as an ancestry where the heritages are things like Angelkin, Musetouched, etc. than I do with Aasimar as a heritage or archetype available for any ancestry.

I've never been a fan of non-human aasimar, tieflings, changelings, etc. and I don't know if we need them. It's my preference that "can breed with surprising things" is sort of humanity's superpower in high fantasy settings.

I always took it as non-human planetouched for the most part had human planetouched heritage with exceptions of races with close ties to origins of that planetouched such as an abyssal planetouched gnoll and dwarvish oread etc


2 people marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:

I like the idea of Aasimar as an ancestry where the heritages are things like Angelkin, Musetouched, etc. than I do with Aasimar as a heritage or archetype available for any ancestry.

I've never been a fan of non-human aasimar, tieflings, changelings, etc. and I don't know if we need them. It's my preference that "can breed with surprising things" is sort of humanity's superpower in high fantasy settings.

While I have also seen the human super power as breeds with anything, I do think allow other races into the planar Touched fold is only reasonable.

Some of the more advanced races are kind of that already (Duergar could be seen as shadow planar or earth plane and Drow are arguably Tiefling drow as the spawn of Lolth depending on the origin/lore).

Im of the opinion that you could potentially restrict the selection based on Attribute distribution or stat distribution chosen dictates the heritage (+CHA free bonus means you're a Musetouched), that gives a little bit of a limit for the base races but Humans are still more versatile since they have multiple Free bonuses.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I mean, one thing is that humans get that ancestry feat that just gives you a multiclass dedication feat without having to meet the prereqs at level 9. I'm fine with giving that to humans, half-elves, and half-orcs but really uncomfortable giving that (and the "choose a different kind of feat" level 1 ancestry feats humans get) to aasimar, tieflings, etc.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:
I mean, one thing is that humans get that ancestry feat that just gives you a multiclass dedication feat without having to meet the prereqs at level 9. I'm fine with giving that to humans, half-elves, and half-orcs but really uncomfortable giving that (and the "choose a different kind of feat" level 1 ancestry feats humans get) to aasimar, tieflings, etc.

Interestingly enough, I think level 9 is the perfect place to start the cut off for certain selections.

Perhaps only one "Ancestry Archetype" is allowed per character, to give the choice more meaning.

And the "Human Paragon" becomes an Ancestry Archetype absorbs those class feats that qualify at 9th level.

This gives those that do not wish to be a "touched race" a reason to invest in their base race (in Paragons), while also allowing the option for touched races.

That's just a take on how it could work, and it wouldn't be too difficult to introduce "Ancestry Archetypes" and make those changes retroactively (anything 9+ falls under "Paragon" status for the base race).

9th level is a really nice sweet spot to introduce these "origin story callbacks", but that's just my take.

You could also just as easily state that Ancestry Archetypes specifically require that your next three Ancestry Feats be of that Archetype (which would make sense and works with the other archetype restrictions outlined). This then means at level 9 they cannot select that Feat, because they have to take another Ancestry Archetype feat instead of one for just Humans, but at 14th level they could maybe go back and get it (which isn't a huge deal at that point, if we're being honest).


3 people marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:
I mean, one thing is that humans get that ancestry feat that just gives you a multiclass dedication feat without having to meet the prereqs at level 9. I'm fine with giving that to humans, half-elves, and half-orcs but really uncomfortable giving that (and the "choose a different kind of feat" level 1 ancestry feats humans get) to aasimar, tieflings, etc.

I mean, I'm pretty much against their general approach with Half-Orcs and Aasimar et al as Feats, but aside from that and trying to be productive :-), it seems like Level Pre-Reqs like Midnightoker mentioned or more specifically Level ADJUSTMENTS can address this: So at Level 9 or 15 etc the Aasimar can now take Level 1 Human Feats, or in your example take the Multiclass Dedication Feat without meeting Pre-Req, but they would only qualify for Feats of that Multiclass using their ADJUSTED Level, meaning low level Feats of that Multiclass would be competing vs high level Feats of normal Class.

Or just flat-out ban it, I'm not opposed. Although I think it would be ironic if Aasimar-as-Feats etc ended up getting killed when that was what drove the hype for Feat approach used for Half-Orcs etc. Which isn't to say I would be opposed to that outcome, I think it would be better than continuing with Planetouched-as-Feat approach even while retaining Half-Elf and Half-Orc-as-Feat because that's already in CRB.

Relatedly, I'm still weirded out how the Multiclass thing got shifted to Human, when the 'Multiclassing Specialist' concept was a specifically Half-Elf thing in P1E (Favored Class). Another reason why I think Half-Elf and -Orcs should have been own Ancestry, but spilled milk etc....

Silver Crusade Contributor

16 people marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:
I like the idea of Aasimar as an ancestry where the heritages are things like Angelkin, Musetouched, etc. than I do with Aasimar as a heritage or archetype available for any ancestry.

This is my preference by far.

Silver Crusade

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Kalindlara wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
I like the idea of Aasimar as an ancestry where the heritages are things like Angelkin, Musetouched, etc. than I do with Aasimar as a heritage or archetype available for any ancestry.
This is my preference by far.

Same.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Rysky wrote:
Kalindlara wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
I like the idea of Aasimar as an ancestry where the heritages are things like Angelkin, Musetouched, etc. than I do with Aasimar as a heritage or archetype available for any ancestry.
This is my preference by far.
Same.

I would imagine it is what should happen, as Aasimar and Tieflings were not just "humans with extras" in PF1. They did not have access to human feats as half-orcs and half-elves did, for example.

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I still really don't like how Half-Orcs and Half-Elves have turned out in 2E, so I will say I do prefer them as unique races. It makes it easier to expand them as their own thing, and shouldn't really get in the way of having Aasimars/Tieflings/ect of other races.

I am a fan of other races having planar scions but those characters are still outsiders, first and foremost.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Kalindlara wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
I like the idea of Aasimar as an ancestry where the heritages are things like Angelkin, Musetouched, etc. than I do with Aasimar as a heritage or archetype available for any ancestry.
This is my preference by far.

Going along the same line of thought, we could add something like "Native Heritage," granting access to feats of an ancestry you specify and changing your size to fit the ancestry (or work the size differences into the planetouched as a base).

I'd really prefer not to resort to "humans by default," and pretending nonhuman planetouched only exist in homebrew.


7 people marked this as a favorite.

Hmm. Aasimar and similar ancestries could have a heritage that connects them with their non-outsider side more closely. A heritage that swaps out your stats/speed/size for that of a non-outsider ancestry and lets you take their feats as well. Then it's more up to you whether you want your planetouched race to focus on their planar side or their material side.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

So considering the two primary reasons to be a non-human aasimar in PF1 were:
1) Fitting a character concept.
2) Being small was mechanically optimal.

Since there are so few differences between medium and small now (it's 100% gear related now, IIRC), couldn't we just have various planetouched folks have a choice of medium or small and let people describe their characters how they like?

If you want to do "my aasimar is super dwarfy, she grew up among dwarfs" you could give them something like the "adopted ancestry" feat as an aasimar feat.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Kalindlara wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
I like the idea of Aasimar as an ancestry where the heritages are things like Angelkin, Musetouched, etc. than I do with Aasimar as a heritage or archetype available for any ancestry.
This is my preference by far.

Likewise.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:

Since there are so few differences between medium and small now (it's 100% gear related now, IIRC), couldn't we just have various planetouched folks have a choice of medium or small and let people describe their characters how they like?

If you want to do "my aasimar is super dwarfy, she grew up among dwarfs" you could give them something like the "adopted ancestry" feat as an aasimar feat.

Agreed, that really feels like best approach. For those wanting to delve more into Demihuman side (for Feat access, or simply 'passing as'/'counting as' etc) there can be Feat for that which helps with balance (which should have Level Adjustment IMHO). That same Feat would apply for "Extra-Human-y" Aasimar as well, it isn't discriminatory. Probably it makes sense for those "Extra-Demihuman" Heritage Feats to be mutually exclusive with "Aasimar Sub-Race" Heritages e.g. Plumekith etc, which all express even more unique Aasimar-ness, the opposite direction of "Extra-Demihuman").

If they do abandon the "(Demi)Human Chassis + Feat" approach, they would need to explicitly state that each character can select an Ethnicity (which determines languages etc) appropriate to (Demi)Human parentage. Even if "variant Aasimar" Heritages (Plumekith etc) are mutually exclusive with taking "Extra-(Demi)Human-y" Feat, a choice of Ethnic identity should still exist if relevant to Demihuman parentage... Paizo only seems to do this with Humans, but who knows, maybe they will extend mechanic in 2e. There certainly seems in-world basis for that, from Pahmet Dwarves, Ekujae Elves, those cannibal jungle halflings etc.

Contributor

13 people marked this as a favorite.

Personally, I like planar scions as "add-ons to any ancestry" much better than them being their own thing. It never sat well with me that only humans were special enough to have children of the planes.

I feel like they could do the whole concept just fine by having a bunch of different heritage feats for a bunch of different outsiders. Like if there was one Aasimar Heritage for characters descended from angels, one for agathions, and so on. Pathfinder 2's big thing seems to be inclusivity between the ancestries, and having a bunch of different options seems better for the game long-term.

But that's just my personal preference.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Alexander Augunas wrote:
It never sat well with me that only humans were special enough to have children of the planes.

Just to clarify, while that was the standard presentation in setting-neutral info on Aasimar, it was explicitly stated in Paizo's setting-specific treatment of Aasimar (Blood of Angels) that Demihuman parentage is 100% legit for Aasimar in Golarion, even including stuff like Lizardfolk. They just all still used the same mechanical stats, except for Size category where that is appropriate (e.g. Halfling parentage). The assumption that a certain mechanical approach is necessary in order for non-human planetouched "to exist" in the world just doesn't hold up.

I also think it's possible to even include some correlation to mortal parentage racial stats even while using singular Aasimar Ancestry (not Feat atop Demihuman Ancestry). As Half-Elves/Orcs could also have been statted up as "Choose one of Elf/Orc Bonus Stats" (+ one fully free choice that everybody gets), more clearly distinguishing them from Humans and tying them other Parentage... Similar approach could apply to Planetouched, for example: Aasimar might always have choice of +2 CHA OR +2 WIS and the normal fully free choice everybody gets, but if parent race has penalty stat they gain that penalty AND choice of one of it's bonus stats. (e.g. DEX/INT in case of Elves)

Not that I'm attached to that, sharing identical stats across the board regardless mortal parentage is fine with me, but if stat differentiation is important element, it doesn't need to be Heritage Feat on top of Ancestry to achieve that, different stats (and Sizes) are possible while using otherwise unitary Ancestry.

I am curious what they will do around enabling Half-Elf and Half-Orc Aasimar, which given those aren't overt Ancestries in their own right wouldn't clearly exist in either model of Planetouched mechanics AFAIK. I'm not how sure important it is such combos do exist, but it feels strange to include what are Core concepts/identities while otherwise going gung-ho on enabling every random combo. I do think the Planetouched-as-unitary-Ancestry (not Feat) approach would be much easier to include Half-Elfs and Half-Orcs, just needing to say those Heritages are also legitimate parentages (and perhaps some wording that if you select "Extra Mortal Parentage" Heritage, you gain benefits of Half-Elf/Orc Heritage Feat?).

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Maybe they could have both worlds and have the various planetouched races be their own race as well as heritage feats to be applied to other races. It wouldn't be that much harder to do or take up that much more space since the racial feats take up the majority of the word count.

THen you could be a pure-blooded version or one where your outsider ancestry has been diluted more that others.

Contributor

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Alexander Augunas wrote:
It never sat well with me that only humans were special enough to have children of the planes.

This was never the case in Golarion's cosmos.

Any planar-scion / planetouched could be of any mortal heritage, be it human, demihuman, other humanoid, etc. PFS had some restrictions on this entirely related to concerns over size category due to non-medium-sized races, but this was purely an organized play restriction, not something otherwise in-universe for Golarion.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

I want both an Aasimar/Tiefling template for every race, and a stand-alone Aasimar/Tiefling.

I've frequently wanted to play a heaven or hell touched version of many different races, and I've also wanted to play characters that really lean into the planar ancestry.

Seems to me there should be no reason why they can't have both. In the case of the template it's like flavoring for the base race, for the stand alone ancestry the base race is an after-thought.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
WatersLethe wrote:

I want both an Aasimar/Tiefling template for every race, and a stand-alone Aasimar/Tiefling.

I've frequently wanted to play a heaven or hell touched version of many different races, and I've also wanted to play characters that really lean into the planar ancestry.

Seems to me there should be no reason why they can't have both. In the case of the template it's like flavoring for the base race, for the stand alone ancestry the base race is an after-thought.

Multiclass Archetypes but for Ancestries. I like it.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Superscriber
Todd Stewart wrote:
Alexander Augunas wrote:
It never sat well with me that only humans were special enough to have children of the planes.

This was never the case in Golarion's cosmos.

Any planar-scion / planetouched could be of any mortal heritage, be it human, demihuman, other humanoid, etc. PFS had some restrictions on this entirely related to concerns over size category due to non-medium-sized races, but this was purely an organized play restriction, not something otherwise in-universe for Golarion.

They always indicated that a Aasimar could be something other than human with angelic blood. However, Aasimar certainly as per how they were depicted/described defaulted to being of human parentage, and then the rules basically said, an Aasimar of Dwarvish/etc. parentage just uses the same rules as the normal Aasimar. [making them all seem humanish]

Honestly, although I can understand one wanting to play a half-orc aasimar, I can also understand the idea of a child of a half-orc who is born as an aasimar could manifest as either a orc-aasimar or human aasimar. [ok, I'm making the assumption half-orc/half-human] Since Aasimar, for instance aren't necessarily supposed to require a near majority of 'genetic material' to manifest, I am not against the potential existence of a half-orc/aasimar as a mechanical option, but I'm ok with the mechanical choice for a half-orc aasimar beign either human/aasimar or orc/aasimar as well.

I didn't care for the people wanting to apply Human and then add half-devil, half-dragon, half-giant to themselves, saying they had a touch of all of those heritages. My thought being, great you have a touch of all of them. I'll give you Human race, making you seven feet tall, ash skin tone, with split tongue, should someone bother to notice. Oh.. yehh... did I mention, basically, mechanically human.

I like the idea of different plane touched ancestries being closer tied to their actual base ancestry. That would seem to be a decent win. If they can manage to make that work with a multi-ancestry heritage, I'd be fine with it, but we have yet to see an example of it so it is hard to say exactly how well it would work.

If you made an Outsider ancestry and then had heritages taking you closer to the base/native ancestry. I'd tend to feel that would be more likely applicable for someone more outsider blood with a taint of a bit of native blood in them. But it could be defined, as needed I supposed for game mechanics reasons, to be more native just enough of the planar to manifest.

The archetype concept is interesting, it might be doable, but might be complicated how it might interact with class archetypes. It might offer an answer to enable a half-orc aasimar. But again, that is a lower priority for me personally, I'd have to see what else it enabled however. It might well be a good mechanic to enable lots of flexibility for other things as well. I like the idea of some of these mixed race situations potentially drawing a stat bonus from their alternate race, potentially reducing their 'selection' to walk them down the direction they are choosing. For instance, if your race gets 2 set, and one free and a drawback, and you choose a mixed ancestry heritage. It might call for your free boost be taken from one of the other ancestry, unless both are the same as your current. You choose between stat weakness between the two ancestries.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I think D&D/Pathfinder could really use a "martial sorcerer" who hits things better because of "bloodlines", without all those pesky "only human" limitations of the fighter. I think between that type of class and the sorcerer (which covers casting spells because of "bloodlines"), I am not sure we would actually need planetouched races, since by being in one of those two classes (and picking the right bloodlines), your PC was either born that way or were remade that way.

I admit I was a big proponent of planetouched as racial feats, but this thread has opened my eyes on the limitations of that approach.

Silver Crusade

7 people marked this as a favorite.

Because I want to play Barbarian Aasimar... and Tieflings... and Ganzi... and Duskwalkers.

And I don't care for spellcasters.

Dataphiles

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:

Because I want to play Barbarian Aasimar... and Tieflings... and Ganzi... and Duskwalkers.

And I don't care for spellcasters.

Bloodragers?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
Mechagamera wrote:

I think D&D/Pathfinder could really use a "martial sorcerer" who hits things better because of "bloodlines", without all those pesky "only human" limitations of the fighter. I think between that type of class and the sorcerer (which covers casting spells because of "bloodlines"), I am not sure we would actually need planetouched races, since by being in one of those two classes (and picking the right bloodlines), your PC was either born that way or were remade that way.

I admit I was a big proponent of planetouched as racial feats, but this thread has opened my eyes on the limitations of that approach.

I disagree, planetouched feel more exact yet bland compared to bloodlines. Bloodlines such as celestial is quite a broad range of ancestry but grow to immense power as you level, but plumekin assimar is more descriptive of one's heritage but never really compares to your class abilities as you grow in levels

Silver Crusade

Chetna Wavari wrote:
Rysky wrote:

Because I want to play Barbarian Aasimar... and Tieflings... and Ganzi... and Duskwalkers.

And I don't care for spellcasters.

Bloodragers?

They’re okay.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Canewolfconram wrote:
Mechagamera wrote:

I think D&D/Pathfinder could really use a "martial sorcerer" who hits things better because of "bloodlines", without all those pesky "only human" limitations of the fighter. I think between that type of class and the sorcerer (which covers casting spells because of "bloodlines"), I am not sure we would actually need planetouched races, since by being in one of those two classes (and picking the right bloodlines), your PC was either born that way or were remade that way.

I admit I was a big proponent of planetouched as racial feats, but this thread has opened my eyes on the limitations of that approach.

I disagree, planetouched feel more exact yet bland compared to bloodlines. Bloodlines such as celestial is quite a broad range of ancestry but grow to immense power as you level, but plumekin assimar is more descriptive of one's heritage but never really compares to your class abilities as you grow in levels

I can see that. My thought is that someone who wanted just a touch of otherworldliness could just dip into one of those classes.

It is probably a moot point, though; if half elves end up as a feat, I will be quite surprised if all the other hybrid ancestries don't as well.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Er, just to clarify, we definitely know that half-elves are not going to be a feat. They are a heritage.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Heritage is a special kind of feat...


2 people marked this as a favorite.
NielsenE wrote:
Heritage is a special kind of feat...

In one sense, sure. It's mechanically more like a class or a background- a choice you can only make at level 1 which informs what sort of person you are. In the actual 2E rulebook we could drop the "feat" part and just say "choose a heritage" as part of what you have to do at level 1 and everything would work the same.

Liberty's Edge

6 people marked this as a favorite.
NielsenE wrote:
Heritage is a special kind of feat...

No, it isn't. Not in the final playtest rules anyway.

There's no way to get more than one of them at the moment, and more importantly it's never referred to as a Feat, and thus does not interact with other mechanics as one. It's no more a Feat than a Cleric's Domain choice is, and is a choice made in much the same way.

Now, it's a character option that you choose from a list, so it looks a little like a Feat, but there are actually a fair number of those in PF2 that are not Feats.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Ah, I must have missed when they stopped calling them heritage feats.


I don't like the idea of letting people choose two heritages, honestly. While there are certainly edge cases where it makes sense, I think the rules should prevent someone from being, say, both a jungle elf and an arctic elf.

I think "choose another heritage" should be a feat specific to planar scions presented as an ancestry, not a general rule.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
NielsenE wrote:
Ah, I must have missed when they stopped calling them heritage feats.

It was part of the, IMO rather fundamental, change where you get one Heritage at 1st level in addition to your Ancestry Feat.

But no worries, there were a lot of iterations of the playtest rules, we all miss something some time.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
NielsenE wrote:
Ah, I must have missed when they stopped calling them heritage feats.

Me too.


Mechagamera wrote:
NielsenE wrote:
Ah, I must have missed when they stopped calling them heritage feats.
Me too.

It was erratae document 1.3 that "heritages" stopped being feats. 1.6 introduced more Ancestry feats for higher level characters (although none of them are heritage locked, I would like each ancestry to have 1 high level feat per heritage so that you can super duper focus on that part of your character design, but I digress)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:

I don't like the idea of letting people choose two heritages, honestly. While there are certainly edge cases where it makes sense, I think the rules should prevent someone from being, say, both a jungle elf and an arctic elf.

I think "choose another heritage" should be a feat specific to planar scions presented as an ancestry, not a general rule.

That's why the general concept for Ancestry Archetypes applies. You can effectively sacrifice your 1st level Ancestry Feat (or a later one for all I care) and pick up one of these Ancestry Archetypes.

I also would hope they would apply to the general races as well in terms of a "more advanced" version of that race (Noble Drow for instance).

That allows for Heritage like behaviors under a new umbrella.

Personally, I find the "water/ice/desert" versions of races to be extremely weak in terms of actual Heritages. Sea Elves as "Elf + Heritage" is really not that much different than "Elf + Demon" logistically.

The problem happens when you want to combine Elf + Demon + Sea, which isn't legal unless Sea Elf is it's own Ancestry (and IMO, if you're going to bother with the concept at all, it should just be it's own Ancestry).

Combining Arctic and Jungle shouldn't be possible, because they directly conflict each other. However, so too is true for Angel and Demon.

Should there be Artic Tiefling Elves? probably not.

Should there be Half-Orc Tieflings? probably.

The real issue is derived from the Half-Orc/Half-Elf handling by roping it under Human.

Does it make logical sense? sure. But it truncates your design space significantly because now the precedent for half races has been specifically limited.

If Half Orc and Half Elf get moved to their own Ancestry, nearly all of the concerns for Planar based Ancestry Archetypes go away.

Liberty's Edge

9 people marked this as a favorite.

After reading this thread, I'm starting to think that the "feat to open up other heritages" idea is what we need, but backwards.

Basically, each planar scion (or other, similarly mixed-heritage ancestry) is its own distinct ancestry, with heritages as per usual. Aasimar have their angelkin and peri-blooded, tieflings their hellspawn and pitborn, etc. However, they also include a heritage that allows them to select one other humanoid ancestry and heritage and count as them for the purposes of ancestry effects and feat prereqs. (I'd suggest making it a heritage because a) that means it only applies at 1st level, which this obviously should and b) I think the fact that the other ancestry is so prominent in this character's bloodline means they can't really manifest the "breeding" needed to distinguish between two very specific subtypes of this planar scion type.)

1 to 50 of 126 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Conversions / Pathfinder Second Edition Planetouched All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.